Politics makes for strange bedfellows indeed. In his race for President, Barack Obama has been attracting an interesting and diverse coalition of supporters. Thousands of people are attending his crowded speeches and donating to his campaign and millions of people are voting for him.
Among his vast throng of supporters are some interesting characters. Just last week we heard Nation of Islam leader Minister Louis Farrakhan, a controversial anti-Semitic and anti-White religious figure, praising Obama. In a speech at a convention in Chicago, Farrakhan told 20,000 supporters, “This young man is the hope of the entire world that American will change and be made better.”
At the last Democratic Party debate, Obama was asked about this support from Farrakhan and after prodding from Hillary Clinton he eventually rejected and denounced the Nation of Islam leader. Now, just a few days later, Obama has been basically endorsed by former KKK leader and white supremacist David Duke.
In an interview with the NewRepublic, Duke said that “I don’t think Obama will be any more negative for the United States than Hillary or John McCain. In fact, we probably have less preference for a European like a John McCain or a Hillary who has betrayed our interests.”
So, what Duke is basically saying is that Obama is the lesser of three evils and the preferable choice for President. Now that Obama has rejected the support of Louis Farrakhan, will he now do the same thing regarding David Duke?
Obama certainly has a knack for bringing people together, marking the first time in history that Farrakhan and Duke agree on anything.
Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA and he is the host of a Louisiana based program, “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 7:30 p.m. Fri. and 10:00 p.m. Sun. on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station, and 8 a.m. till Noon weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans and the Northshore. For more information, visit his web site at www.ringsidepolitics.com. E-mail him at jeff@ringsidepolitics.com.
Oh my bad, I guess now a spade is called a shovel....... but it is as I suspected, you can't dig it. And for a moment there I thought I saw a flickering of light emitting from your dark corner of the universe..... Written by So scoop sum up.....
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
My workweek ends Thursday at 4, so before I go home lemme say dis Cher. Fo' many years da black people who were sent to Liberia as freed slaves from the U.S. had total control of the government (maybe they still do, me Cher I donno) - only those who were descended from these former slaves could be government officials, police officers or military officers - the exact same setup white-dominated South Africa had. Same difference, whatever you so call it, yeah, same-same. Just looking at Rwanda and Sudan, one can realize subjugation is not just a "white thang." Also it shows that blacks are just as ruthless towards those perceived to be different (and therefore "less worthy") as any group of humans are capable of, genocide is not just a "white thing" either. Not that it matters but I voted for the crook, not the Nazi. It is extremely foolish to lose a friendship over politics, since unless one is in office one's impact will be less than that of a fly crashing headlong into a moving freight train, nil. Me Cher, tonite I'll go dance to dat Creole Frenchie music here in town. I recommend it highly, white folks, black folks, all dancin' wit each other passin' a good time. Life lived da way it should be, now dat's "Naturally Louisiana" and why dis here bes da bestus state dere be, despite da faults its gots. Written by ...or one could bowl
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey "work, work, work" - I wasn't offended by what you wrote, and I was out of the state for most of the nineties, so I actually wasn't here when Duke ran for governor. In answer to your questions, first, I would call Farrakhan an anti-Semite, but I wouldn't call him a racist. I reserve the term "racist" for those in power - i.e., it's the subjugation of one race by another. Here in the US, since whites have the power, they can be racist, but blacks, who are generally powerless, cannot. Blacks can be prejudiced (and clearly Farrakhan is prejudiced against whites), but they cannot be racist, per se. I know that this is not how a lot of people (especially whites) use the term, and that this will probably stimulate lots of grumbling among my fellow white citizens, but it's how I use it. Second, I know people don't like to be demonized, but let me put it this way - you cannot pass off a vote for David Duke as a rational, responsible, or right thing to do. Voting for him, no matter what you tell yourself, makes you (to some degree) a racist. Sorry if that demonizes you, but that's how I see it. And by "you" I mean "one" - not necessarily you, "work, work, work." Third, most of my friends are more conservative than I am (how could they help but be) and we get along just fine. The anonymity of this whole thing makes me a little more, let's say, "unvarnished" than I am in person. As for Righteous' comment, unless you (and here I mean "you") are also using the moniker "Calling a spade a spade," then my response was not aimed at you! Lache pas! TW Written by Tee Dub
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I wasn't implying that your vote decided either election, or that you would agree with the motives of any who voted - or for that matter - "you" in any way. The post was rather "my take" on why this Nazi garnered so many votes besides those from racist hate mongers. BTW, if Farrakhan ran for office, would you characterize any of his supporters as racists or anti-Semitic? Or is that reserved only for those whose political opinions differ from yours? Possibly so, left-wingers being so warm hearted, uh... except for Pol-Pot, Stalin and a few others. You see Buddy, I know you disassociate from the Left wing fringe - correctly so - but in lieu of "demonizing" those who disagree with you instead try to understand that just because some of us have political beliefs to the right of Ted Kennedy does not mean we adulate Hitler; no more so than those who wish for environmental safeguards supported or desire to emulate the "Unabomber." Anyway, what did “Righteous” say about me... I must have been nodding off for that one... Written by lighten up TW
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Didn't think you could....... I just luv the hypocritical cynics. They make life wonderful. Written by .
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't vote for the guy who wore a Nazi uniform in college, who was a Grand Wizard in the KKK, and who constantly blathers on about "Europeans" vs. "Africans" and "Equal Rights for White People" etc., etc., etc. - no matter how high my taxes were going to go. So that argument doesn't mean much to me. And rest assured, not all those people were voting their pocketbooks. There are a lot of racists in Metairie - I know, I lived there for three years. And as for the "dig it" guy - maybe "Righteous" is right about you and your drug use after all! TW Written by Tee Dub
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The racists are not just in North Louisiana. St. Tammany has a bunch of them as well. Written by Dan
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Well aren't you just the illusionary visionary TW... Can ya dig it???? Written by Calling a spade a spade...................
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jeff, what a silly column. Talk about a tempest in a teapot, this is truly one of them. Written by CL
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
David Duke won a state district due to the fact his rich white opponent was trying to cozy up to other rich whites by opposing the Homestead exemption in an effort to increase the number of people paying property taxes. That doesn't fly in the land of Cherardy (Metairie). A black gay Communist (who SUPPORTS the Homestead exemption) would have stood a better chance of defeating Duke since people do "vote their pocketbook." I can assure you, had Duke been for eliminating the Homestead exemption and his opponent did not, he would not have stood a chance of winning an office representing Metairie. As far as the governor's election, you may be right that central and northern Louisiana has a lot of racists but keep in mind that Duke's opponent was not only a crook but was also perceived as someone who favored south Louisiana over the rest of the state (dat ol' pocketbook stuff again). Written by work, work, work, that's all I do
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
C'mon Jeff, that's a bit of a stretch. Duke is saying Obama is preferable only because he isn't a white person who is "betraying their race." Somewhat less than an endorsement, no? Personally I would habe preferred Obama to have instantly rejected and denounced Farrakhan. You are correct in grouping Duke and Farrakhan together though, they are mirror images of the same hatred. Written by kerry fox
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jeff, you're not quite right about the facts here - Obama had already (and quickly) "denounced" Farrakhan, but at the debate Hillary asked him if he also "rejected" him - Obama cooly responded that if Senator Clinton felt that "rejected" was a stronger word than "denounced," then he would do both. As for David Duke, his relevance to anything of substance is beyond me. I wish he'd stay over in Russia or Iran or whatever country wants him. The fact that he held an elective office in this state, and almost became governor, speaks volumes about how many uninformed racist yahoos we have here. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 2/28/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Politics makes for strange bedfellows indeed. In his race for President, Barack Obama has been attracting an interesting and diverse coalition of supporters. Thousands of people are attending his crowded speeches and donating to his campaign and millions of people are voting for him. 
